Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-277 - USA v. Ahmed


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-277 - USA v. Ahmed
June 24, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 91 Motion in Limine as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1); granting 93 Motion in Limine as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1) -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN OPINION AND ORDER, the government's motion is granted in its entirety. Defendant's motion is granted in part and denied in part, as follows: (1) evidence of the wife's $1,000,000 wire transfer is admitted; (2) evidence of Defendant's disproportionate billing is admitted partially; and (3) evidence that Defendant's billing spiked in 2011 is admitted partially. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 6/24/2016. (Irizarry, Dora)
July 1, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER granting 122 Motion in Limine as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1); granting 123 Motion in Limine as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1); granting in part and denying in part 124 Motion in Limine as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1) - For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN OPINION AND ORDER, the government's second motion in limine is granted. Defendant's second motion in limine is granted to the extent that the government is precluded from arguing that "taxpayers" are victims of Defendant's fraud or referring to "taxpayers" when describing Medicare, and otherwise is denied. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 7/1/2016. (Irizarry, Dora)
July 1, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER as to Syed Imran Ahmed re 132 Letter Requesting Leave to Conduct a Rule 15 Deposition -=- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, the government's motion for leave to conduct a Rule 15 deposition is granted. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 7/1/2016. (Irizarry, Dora)
July 25, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Government's 203 Motion for Forfeiture of Property as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1); and denying Defendant's 204 Motion for Acquittal as to Syed Imran Ahmed (1) --- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED OPINION AND ORDER, Defendant's Motion for a new trial or verdict of acquittal is denied in its entirety and the Government's Motion for forfeiture is granted, in part. The Court finds the Defendant is liable for and must forfeit at least $3,090,044.10, which represents the entire amount sought by the government for the Class I and Class II Claims. The Court will determine the additional amount Defendant must forfeit, if any, at the time of sentencing. As set forth in this Court's Opinion and Order in Discussion ยง II.C.2.c, at pp. 38-43, the parties' sentencing submissions shall address the concerns raised by the Court regarding the governments calculation of the Class III forfeiture amount. A sentencing scheduling order will issue separately. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 7/25/2017. (Irizarry, Dora)
January 17, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER granting 218 Motion for Forfeiture of Property as to Syed Imran Ahmed -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN SUMMARY ORDER, the government's forfeiture motion is granted. The Court finds that the Defendant is liable for and must forfeit $4,175,964.85, which represents the entire revised amount sought by the government for the Class III Claims, and brings the total amount of forfeiture for Class I, Class II, and Class III Claims to $7,266,008.95. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 1/17/2018. (Irizarry, Dora)